Iran Thread

[Elvis]

of course I defer to mossad, they have my interests in mind here. and yours too, but you're too stupid to see that.



did they? news to me.

The Mossad have American's interests in mind?

LOL

[Kuya]

of course I defer to mossad, they have my interests in mind here. and yours too, but you're too stupid to see that.



did they? news to me.

Why did you mention Mossad then? A poster said Iran has nukes, and apparently nobody, not even Mossad thinks Iran has nukes right now. Elvis countered the statement that Iran has nukes. I don't understand why you mentioned Mossad in that exchange.

[solanis]

because mossad's information will be the primary player in whether israel puts iran down like a rabid dog or not.

[Kuya]

because mossad's information will be the primary player in whether israel puts iran down like a rabid dog or not.

But fagwad and elvis weren't arguing about who was going to influence israel's decision to attack Iran. They were talking about whether Iran had nukes or not. Why did you inject this argument into their exchange?

[Mazmaz]

Guys I'm not gonna make a WSJ account to read your links lol

[Elvis]

Speaking of "rabid dogs":

Martin van Crevald, Professor of military history at Hebrew University:

We possess several hundred atomic warheads and rockets and can launch them at targets in all directions, perhaps even at Rome. Most European capitals are targets for our air force. Let me quote General Moshe Dayan: 'Israel must be like a mad dog, too dangerous to bother.' I consider it all hopeless at this point. We shall have to try to prevent things from coming to that, if at all possible. Our armed forces, however, are not the thirtieth strongest in the world, but rather the second or third. We have the capability to take the world down with us. And I can assure you that that will happen before Israel goes under.

Source: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2003...s.bookextracts

[solanis]

But fagwad and elvis weren't arguing about who was going to influence israel's decision to attack Iran. They were talking about whether Iran had nukes or not. Why did you inject this argument into their exchange?

...did you read the thread? they were talking about israel's rationale and posting links about how iran totally isn't working towards nukes. idk what you're missing here.

[Kuya]

...did you read the thread? they were talking about israel's rationale and posting links about how iran totally isn't working towards nukes. idk what you're missing here.

So what you're saying is that you weren't following the discussion that took place above the post in question? That makes sense, because your reply was nonsensical, and it gave me the impression you were only trolling.

These were the posts before your post:

Iran doesn't have nukes. Israel does though and unlike Iran, has not signed the NPT.

How do we know they don't have nukes? What if everyone is wrong and they do?

How do we know that YOU don't have nukes? Seriously, your name is 'fhqwghads' which sounds suspicious for me.

As a side-note, since I didn't cite this before in the comment above Fqkfhjlkdfshk's post:

Source: George Washington University's National Security Archive (all based on primary sources obtained after the Freedom of Information Act)

More info. (again, based on primary sources - declassified documents, cables, reports)

And then you posted this:

Elvis knows more about Iran's nuclear plans than all of mossad. they should just hire you, kiddo!

It was very confusing. I certainly hope you weren't trolling.

[solanis]

if you can't follow the thread, I really can't help you kuya. I certainly hope you're not trolling right now! as we both know that's against the rules...

[Elvis]

Guys I'm not gonna make a WSJ account to read your links lol

I don't know what happened but when the story broke, it wasn't restricted. Might have been just that though, because they just posted it. It just goes on to say that the IAEA isn't releasing the details of their report, due to our opposition or something. I misunderstood the last part. I'm sure the story will be getting coverage elsewhere.

[solanis]

I'm especially a fan of your contention that research is worthless if it comes from the internet.

this guy cites wikipedia on his research papers. internet is a good place to get a vague idea of what the fuck, but it doesn't make you a nation's intelligence agency

[Elvis]

I'm especially a fan of your contention that research is worthless if it comes from the internet.

Not just the internet, but research in general. Particularly declassified US documents, Israeli documents, correspondence between Israeli leaders and American leaders, candid interviews w/ Israeli military personnel, etc.

EDIT:

Side-note

With regard to 'leaked Israeli documents' -

(from the link above)

In most cases, the ideas discussed among Palestinians, Israelis and, often, Americans, were nonbinding proposals, not final agreements, that largely mirrored the substance of previously disclosed talks.

But a few surprises have embarrassed the Palestinian Authority, including an unverified report Tuesday that accused a senior Palestinian official of discussing with Israelis the assassination of a Gaza militant in 2005.

More than anything, the dozens of documents released as of Tuesday provide a rare look at the inner workings of one of the world's most intractable conflicts, particularly concerning Palestinians' positions and possible motivations.

For one thing, the documents show that Palestinian leaders appeared to be far more willing to cut a peace deal than most Israelis, and even many Palestinians, believed.

In contrast with Israelis' portrayal of Palestinian leaders as rejectionists, the Palestinians come across in the papers as the side better-prepared, with maps, charts and compromises, even broaching controversial trade-offs that went beyond what their own people were probably ready to accept.

[Elvis]

this guy cites wikipedia on his research papers.

I know you aren't talking about me.

If I have ever cited Wikipedia on BG it was simply for cursory information (like what is this organization or who is this person) - and NOT for the editorial.

[Elvis]

You have to be an Israeli (not Palestinian; they don't exist) to actually know what is happening in Israel.

So you have to be an American to know what is happening in America (or Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Libya - by extension).

The Solanis School of Journalism.

[Indalecia]

I thought the endangered species "solanius douchicus" never left the island of manhattan for evolutionary reasons.

[Xno Kappa]

Clearly we're either all scholars or work for an intelligence agency here on BG.

[Churchill]

However that statement is true for some of us and the Mossad isn't as competent as IRGC-QF and Iran doesn't have nukes.

Iran also doesn't have MRBM/SRBM capability so making the jump to true ICBM w/nuclear capability is so far fetched any claim in it's favor is ridiculous and complete bullshit.

[Indalecia]

To be fair, I haven't been involved with MILINT since 2006.

So there's that.

[Andalusian girls]

However that statement is true for some of us and the Mossad isn't as competent as IRGC-QF and Iran doesn't have nukes.

wat

Mossad kills Iranian nuclear scientists and senior military personnel all the time

has the Quds Force even been able to infiltrate Israel

i mean their promulgated intelligence reports are clearly manufactured propaganda designed to drum up both domestic and international support for sorties against Iran but they're pretty great at walking into hotel rooms and electrocuting people to death when they want to

If they get pre-emptively bombed by Israel, we'll see. China and Russia just vetoed a UN resolution condemning the Syrian government, for example.

no one gives a shit about Iran beyond their oil which the targeted strikes won't effect beyond temporary price gauging by speculators; if and when Israel strikes the only potential third party backlash they'd receive would be from Hamas and Hezbollah.

[Elvis]

Yea, I agree. Russia and China aren't going to war over Iran.

However, at the same time the Mossad is so bumbling and obvious in their operations - like the theft of British civilian passports or the car-bombings of Iranian scientists. Everyone knows it's Israel. In the case of the former incident, the attack took place in Saudi Arabia (I think) - another US client State. So the Arabs get upset, and expel the Israeli ambassador. Or the EU issues a slap-on-the-wrist comment like 'we feel this does not advance the peace process'.

I think you should consider that no one is going to hold Israel accountable for these actions. The 'world' might not be with the US and Israel on issues like I-P (example: Palestinian Statehood bid), but 'the world' does not matter. There is no consequence for these actions. Our politicians on the other hand are working to get MEK off the terrorist list, while we surround Iran. The Iranians have plenty to be scared shitless of.

The Cold War is over. The US won, and no one is officially going to mess w/ our client States. That is why all this hysteria over Iran is horseshit. Any Iranian nuclear attack on Israel would not even rise to the level of a pyrrhic victory for the Iranians. Their regime is having enough trouble staying in power amidst all the uprisings in the ME. Why would they go out of their way to fuck themselves?

Iran is another distraction. The only reason the US (and by extension Israel) care about Iran is because it threatens, simply by existing (since the average Iranian has no reason to love the US after 1953 and blah blah), US hegemony in the region. The ME belongs to the countries of the ME, not to us or the Brits. But just like our adventures in Latin America, we seek to maintain "balancing power" (as stated by Jeanne Kirkpatrick) all over the world.

The principles laid out in the Santa Fe document (that became the blueprint for Reagan era foreign policy toward Latin America) could just so easily be seen as our strategy for every single part of the world where we seek strategic control/influence/etc.